Mating systems in prehistoric populations. An evolutionary approach and archaeological evidence, PZ...

208 Marcin S. Przybyła, Mating systems in prehistoric populationsDOI 10.1515/pz-2013-0007 Praehistorische Zeitschrift 2013; 88(1–2): 208–225

I. Abhandlungen

Marcin S. Przybyła

Mating systems in prehistoric populations.An evolutionary approach and archaeologicalevidence

Abstract: Der aktuelle Forschungsstand deutet darauf

hin, dass die Vielfältigkeit der Heiratsformen, die sich in

vormodernen Gesellschaften beobachten lassen, das Er-

gebnis evolutionären Drucks sind. Dieser Ansicht zufolge

können Polygamie und Monogamie als konkurrierende

Strategien angesehen werden, die sich unter bestimmten

Umständen ausbreiten. Der folgende Beitrag will dies auf

der Grundlage archäologischer Daten überprüfen. Dazu

werden aus zwölf Gräberfeldern der Kupfer- und Bronze-

zeit in Mitteleuropa detaillierte Informationen zum Ge-

schlechterverhältnis und zu Unterschieden im Reichtum

der Grabausstattung ausgewertet. Diese Ergebnisse wer-

den dann mit den Vermögensunterschieden und der Sub-

sistenzgrundlage der ausgewählten Populationen ver-

glichen. Es scheint, dass diesen beiden Faktoren für die

Erklärung der Vielfalt menschlicher Heiratssysteme eine

Schlüsselrolle zukommt.

Die potentiellen Ergebnisse dieser Studie steuern

neue Argumente für die Diskussion um Heiratsformen in

frühen europäischen Gesellschaften bei. Andererseits

kann ein Vergleich gewisser Elemente archäologischer

Quellen mit Konzepten aus der Humanökologie zu einem

besseren Verständnis der Funktionsweise prähistorischer

Gesellschaften beitragen.

Keywords: Europäische Vorgeschichte; Kupferzeit; Bron-

zezeit; Heiratssysteme; Heiratsstrategien; darwinistische

Archäologie; Gräberanalyse

Abstract: L’état de la recherche actuel montre que la mul-

tiplicité des formes de mariage observées dans les sociétés

pré-modernes résulte de la pression exercée par l’évolu-

tion. De ce point de vue, la polygamie et la monogamie

peuvent être considérées comme des stratégies concur-

rentielles qui peuvent s’étendre sous certaines conditions.

Cette contribution a pour but de le vérifier sur la base de

données archéologiques. On a analysé à cet effet des infor-

mations détaillées concernant la proportion des sexes et

les écarts de richesse que présentent les mobiliers funérai-

res de douze nécropoles du Chalcolithique et de l’âge du

Bronze en Europe centrale. Les résultats obtenus sont

alors comparés aux écarts affichés par les richesses maté-

rielles et aux moyens de subsistance des populations sé-

lectionnées. Ces deux facteurs semblent jouer un rôle clé

dans l’explication de cette multitude de systèmes matri-

moniaux.

Les résultats potentiels de cette étude fournissent de

nouveaux arguments aux discussions sur les formes de

mariage dans les sociétés primitives de l’Europe. D’autre

part, la comparaison de certains éléments de sources ar-

chéologiques avec des concepts appartenant à l’écologie

humaine peut contribuer à mieux saisir la manière dont ils

reflètent le mode de fonctionnement des sociétés préhisto-

riques.

Keywords: préhistoire européenne; Chalcolithique; âge

du Bronze; systèmes matrimoniaux; stratégies matrimo-

niales; archéologie darwinienne; analyse des tombes

Abstract: The current state of research suggests that the

wide diversity in marriage forms observed in pre-modern

societies can be explained as a result of evolutionary

pressure. According to this view, both polygyny and mon-

ogamy may be considered as competing strategies which

will spread under certain circumstances. The objective of

this paper is to verify this supposition based on archae-

ological evidence. For this purpose I will examine detailed

information concerning sex ratio and differences in the

wealth of grave goods in twelve cemeteries of the Central

European Copper and Bronze Age. Then I will compare the

results with data related to the degree of wealth inequality

and the form of subsistence in the examined populations.

It seems that both factors play a key role in the origin of

variation in human mating systems.

The preliminary results of this investigation can pro-

vide new arguments in the discussion on diversity in mar-

riage forms among ancient Europeans. On the other hand,

the comparison of certain elements of archaeological evi-

Authenticated | [email protected] author's copyDownload Date | 5/14/14 4:53 PM

Marcin S. Przybyła, Mating systems in prehistoric populations 209

dence and concepts of human behavioural ecology can

contribute to a better understanding of the actual func-

tioning of past populations.

Keywords: European prehistory; Copper Age; Bronze Age;

mating systems; marriage strategies; Darwinian archaeol-

ogy; burial analysis

Dr. Marcin S. Przybyła: Instytut Archeologii, Uniwersytet Jagiel-loñski, ul. Gołèbia 11, 31–007 Kraków, Polska. E-Mail: [email protected]

The evolutionary study of matingsystemsMating systems in contemporary human communities are

characterised by a diversity unparalleled among other

species. It is therefore no surprise that the reasons of this

diversity have long been a subject of anthropological in-

vestigation. Studies of contemporary traditional societies,

described in the Standard Cross-Cultural Sample (SCCS)

database, have indicated that polygyny occurs among as

many as 83 % of the groups described there, although only

in 28 % of populations is the share of polygynous mar-

riages higher than 40 %. Monogamy, with a restrictive ap-

proach towards cases of polygyny, has been recorded in

17 % of these communities, and polyandry happens mar-

ginally1.

Comparative anthropological studies provide several

interesting facts which may suggest possible sources of

polygyny. One of the most frequently mentioned is a dis-

proportion in the number of men and women2. It is caused

by high male mortality rates (due to natural causes or in

accidents and warfare) and by emigration of the male part

of a population resulting from overpopulation and in-

creased rivalry for resources3. Other authors put more

stress on the role of the natural environment and environ-

mentally-determined cultural factors. Rich areas with no

geographical barriers are able to sustain large polyga-

mous families and favour mobility and migration of indi-

viduals (especially women) between groups. That is why

polygyny frequently occurs in pastoral communities, where

1 E.g. Low 1988; Ember/Ember/Low 2007, for the recent discussion

about diversity in marriage forms among historic and modern Indo-

European-speaking peoples, see Fortunato 2011.

2 Recently: Ember/Ember/Low 2007, 430–437.

3 E.g. Sherratt 1972, 501.

mobility usually goes together with aggressiveness and,

as a result, favours gaining wives via military expeditions.

Monogamy is more common among farmers and fisher-

men, permanently tied to the small territory they occupy4.

A new approach to the differentiation of mating sys-

tems has been proposed by evolutionary studies which

perceive monogamy and polygyny as the strategies

adopted by individuals to enhance their reproductive suc-

cess. For several years it has been accepted that for hu-

mans, like for other mammals5, a typical mating system is

polygyny6. Monogamy was seen as one of the cultural be-

haviours developed during the early stages of evolution in

order to reduce intra-group tensions7. In this context, it is

worthwhile mentioning the examples, known from his-

torical accounts, of polygyny among the highest social

classes of societies that otherwise practised monogamy

for cultural (e.g. religious) reasons8 (Fig. 1). However, new

empirical data have revealed no statistically significant

difference in reproductive success of men from monog-

amous and polygynous communities9. In other words,

men, unlike males of numerous other species, show no

straightforward correlation between the number of female

partners and their reproductive success10. Therefore, mon-

ogamy and polygyny may be regarded as competing strat-

egies, which will be evolutionary stable under certain spe-

cific circumstances.

These circumstances are determined on the one hand

by different interests of males and females, and on the

other hand by differences in the scale and form of trans-

mitting resources from parents to children, resulting from

the economic strategies adopted11. From a female’s point

of view, polygyny may become a preferred behaviour

when her acceptance of a partner who already has other

wives brings higher reproductive benefits than staying in a

monogamous relation. Such situation – called the “poly-

gyny threshold”12 – may occur if two factors are present: a

significant differentiation in the distribution of resources,

and their considerable impact on the reproductive success

of the offspring13.

4 White 1988; White/Burton 1988.

5 Trivers 1972.

6 E.g. Shennan 2002, 184–185; Low 2005, 68; Ember/Ember/Low

2007, 428–429.

7 Bowles/Choi/Hopfensitz 2003, 135; Alexander 2009, 71–72; 142.

8 E.g. Scheidel 2009.

9 Fortunatto/Archetti 2010, 150.

10 Brown/Laland/Borgerhoff Mulder 2009, 301–303.

11 Bowles/Smith/Borgerhoff Mulder 2010; Smith et al. 2010a; Shen-

nan 2011.

12 Orians 1969.

13 Borgerhoff Mulder 1990, 255–256.


210 Marcin S. Przybyła, Mating systems in prehistoric populations

In hunter-gatherer communities these conditions are not

met. Hunter-gatherer communities are characterised by

little economic differentiation, and resources transferred

to children (e.g. knowledge, social relations) are of the

kind that has very limited impact on social position – and

hence reproductive success – of the offspring14. A similarly

low transmission and variability of resources is observed

in populations of horticulturalists15. However, polygyny

may nevertheless spread in these groups as a male repro-

ductive strategy. The key factor is the level of male con-

tribution to offspring maintenance16. In the communities

in which women’s activities are prevalent in food acquisi-

tion (especially among gatherers), men can afford numer-

14 Smith et al. 2010b; Smith et al. 2010a, 85–93.

15 Gurven et al. 2010.

16 Marlowe 2003, 293–302; 2005, 56; Fortunato/Archetti 2009,

152–153.

ous offspring without bearing additional costs connected

with gaining resources. In such situations, a man’s mating

success will translate into his reproductive success. At the

same time, the “voice” of women may become more im-

portant17, and for them a criterion for choosing partners

will be physical fitness rather than resources. This is con-

firmed by a distinct correlation between the areas of high

pathogen stress (tropics in particular) and increased rates

of polygyny18.

Unlike among hunters-gatherers, resources in far-

ming and pastoral populations (animal herds, farmland)

can be predictably controlled and passed on from gener-

ation to generation19. Therefore, the “vertical” trans-

mission of resources plays a crucial role in the survival

and reproductive success of offspring. Consequently,

groups of animal herders and farmers show significant

differences with regard to the wealth at the disposal of in-

dividuals or lineages20. A high level of economic differ-

entiation may create evolutionary pressure, activating the

polygyny threshold model, although empirical research

on contemporary pre-modern farming21 and herding22 so-

cieties gave ambiguous results in this respect. Wealth

variability may also result in higher reproductive benefits,

obtained in rich families by investing in the marriage of

sons (bride price), and in poor families by investing in

daughters, who could “marry up”23. In farming/herding

populations, there are also other factors which may favour

monogamy or polygamy. The most important seems the

depreciation of resources resulting from sharing them

among offspring24. In herding groups, inherited resources

are animal herds which can be quickly reproduced. There-

fore, in subsequent generations, the value of transmitted

goods per family member should not vary significantly,

even provided that a kinship group grows steadily. What

is more, the specific character of resources available to

herdsmen allows using them not only as a subsistence

basis, but also as a means of building social relations25.

In the case of farming communities the situation is

different. Here, basic heritable resources are land use

rights, which increase their value with the intensification

17 Low 2005, 68.

18 Marlowe 2003, 293–298; Ember/Ember/Low 2007, 431–437.

19 Shennan 2011, 920–921.

20 Borgerhoff Mulder et al. 2010; Shenk et al. 2010; Smith et al.

2010a, 85–93.

21 Borgerhoff Mulder 1990; Strassmann 2000.

22 Sellen/Borgerhoff Mulder/Sieff 2000.

23 Hartung 1982; Roth 2004, 73–74.

24 Fortunato/Archetti 2010, 154.

25 E.g. Shennan 2011, 921.

Fig. 1: Tombstone of Count von Gleichen and two accompanyingwomen. The legend refers it to Ernst von Gleichen (1160–ca. 1246)who supposedly obtained the pope’s permission to have two wivesafter having returned from a crusade. Erfurt cathedral, 2nd half of the13th century (photo Marzena Przybyła)



of farming26 or when the possibility of extending the acre-

age becomes limited. Under such conditions, dividing

resources (land) between numerous offspring will result

in depreciation of their value per family member in suc-

cessive generations. To prevent this, property in farming

societies is inherited by only one child, usually the oldest

or the youngest son27, or a tendency to limit the number of

male offspring can appear28. Such tendencies may pro-

mote monogamy as a prevailing mating system.

The above review leads to the conclusion that the

presence or domination of a specific mating system does

not stem from a single determinant, but from the combi-

nation of various factors. Three of these can be mentioned

as the most important: (i) level of male investment in sur-

vival and reproductive success of offspring, (ii) differenti-

ation of the value of resources at the disposal of men and

(iii) extent to which resources are permanently depreci-

ated when divided among offspring (Fig. 2). Polygyny in a

hypothetical population will be promoted by a low value

26 Adler 1996.

27 E.g. Boone 1986, 868–869; Chu 1991.

28 E.g. Beise/Voland 2002.

of men’s contribution, combined with a low level of econ-

omic differentiation and its low influence on the offspring’s

social position. Such a situation occurs in numerous con-

temporary hunter-gatherer communities. However, high

values of these factors may create conditions described in

the polygyny threshold model. The level that the econ-

omic inequality and parental investment in their off-

spring’s social position must reach to make polygyny a fa-

voured strategy will then depend on the degree to which it

is women who choose their partners. It seems, however,

that the patriarchal suzerainty over the female part of the

population, especially with respect to marriage, can be

viewed as one of the predictors of polygyny29. On the other

hand, an important factor reducing the impact of econ-

omic inequality between men on selecting polygyny will

be the extent to which resources controlled by men lose

their value after they are divided among offspring. There-

fore, polygyny is most likely to appear in populations en-

gaged in animal husbandry (both mobile pastoral groups

and settled herders), especially if they show distinct econ-

omic differentiation. Monogamy will be preferred in far-

29 E.g. Marlowe 2003, 284; Low 2005, 68–69.

Fig. 2: Factors promoting polygyny (dark area) and monogamy (light area)



ming groups occupying densely populated centres of

settlement oekumenes. However, its competitiveness with

respect to polygyny will decrease in marginal zones (with

enough room for economic expansion) and in groups with

more distinct economic differentiation due to availabil-

ity of resources other than cultivated land (supplemen-

tary role of animal husbandry, exploitation of rare re-

sources).

The aim of the present paper is to confront the above

regularities with the archaeological record. The study de-

scribed below is based on the analysis of grave goods from

selected Neolithic, Bronze Age and Early Iron Age cem-

eteries in Central Europe. It attempts to identify differ-

ences in male and female grave assemblages, which might

be interpreted as resulting from polygyny or monogamy,

and to then compare them with parameters describing

economic differentiation and the production system of the

discussed populations.

Sources and methodology

Criteria of source selection

The investigation is based on data obtained from twelve

cemeteries. The sites were selected using the criterion of

the number of graves with reliably determined age and sex

of the deceased. Selected for analysis were the graves of

adults (juvenis/adultus-senilis) with no traces of looting or

other secondary actions which might have influenced the

homogeneity of the contents. Burials where the unam-

biguous determination of sex was impossible due to the

small number of bones (in cremations) or their poor state

of preservation were not included30. The selected cem-

eteries represent a broad span of time. The cemetery at Tis-

zapolgár-Basatanya, kom. Hajdú-Bihar31 comes from the

early Eneolithic of the Carpathian Basin (the Tiszapolgár

culture), while the site at Budakalász, kom. Pest32 dates to

the end of this period (the Baden complex). The Early

Bronze Age is represented by the cemetery at Singen,

Kr. Konstanz33 in the Alpine zone, and by roughly contem-

porary sites of the so-called Epi-corded Carpathian Cul-

tural Circle from Iwanowice, pow. Miechów34, Jelåovce,

30 E.g. Kunter 1993, 208.

31 Bognár-Kutzián 1963.

32 Bondár/Raczky 2009.

33 Krause 1988.

34 Kadrow/Machnik/Machnik 1992.

okr. Nitra35 and Branb, okr. Nitra36. The Tumulus Circle

cemetery at Tápé, kom. Szeged is slightly younger37. Sites

such as Bachórz-Chodorówka, pow. Rzeszów38, Pysznica,

pow. Stalowa Wola39, Przeczyce, pow. Zawiercie40 and

Obereching, Kr. Salzburg41 represent local variants of the

Urnfield complex from the Late Bronze Age and the begin-

nings of the Iron Age. Finally, the cemetery at Chotín, okr.

Komárno42 belongs to the so-called Traco-Scythian groups

of the Iron Age in the Carpathian Basin. The broad chro-

nological and spatial span represented by the sites se-

lected for analysis was chosen to reduce the impact of

similarities or differences resulting from historical con-

nections, diffusion or the transmission of cultural traits.

A similar solution to this methodological problem is ap-

plied in comparative studies in anthropology43.

Determination of status on the basis of graveassemblages

The way in which the organisation of social life translates

into burial rites belongs to the most frequently discussed

issues in archaeology44. According to some scholars, the

burial rite has been created for specific social purposes,

thus it reflects an ideal society rather than real relations

within it45. At the same time, in pre-modern communities,

wealth need not translate directly into status within a

group46. Bearing these restrictions in mind, one should

however not forget that funerary evidence remains the pri-

mary, and sometimes the only, source for studying the or-

ganisation of prehistoric societies. Furthermore, for the

issue analysed in this paper, it is important to identify the

economic position of the deceased (which may be more

directly manifested in lavish grave goods), rather than

their actual status within the group.

The evaluation of the wealth of a grave assemblage

can be based on a grading scale established for particular

35 Bátora 2000.

36 Vladár 1973.

37 Trogmayer 1975.

38 Gedl 1994; Szybowicz 1995.

39 Czopek 2001.

40 Szydłowska 1968; 1972.

41 Höglinger 1993.

42 Duåek 1966.

43 Compare: Mace/Holden 2005, 119–120; Murdock/White 2006.

44 For a review of older literature, see: Bartel 1982; Ames 2008,

495–501.

45 Bernbeck 1997, 264–268, and literature cited in this work.

46 E.g. Müller/Bernbeck 1996, 1–2; 16–19.



elements, either a priori47 or relatively48. Another method

consists in a simple count of artefacts or of their types, ne-

glecting differences in their value49. Due to the cultural

diversity of the sources, in the present study this latter,

simpler solution was used. Grave wealth was evaluated

proceeding from the number of artefacts discovered, with

additional division into ceramic and non-ceramic equip-

ment. To exclude the potential impact of differences in

male and female costume, the calculations of wealth stan-

dards were conducted for each sex separately. Addition-

ally, in order to control the results obtained, for some cem-

eteries a more sophisticated, relative method of wealth

estimation was also used (the so-called “scarcity index”)50.

The picture it provided is comparable with that obtained

by the simple counting of inventory units (e.g. Fig. 3).

47 E.g. according to the criterion of the time needed to manufacture

it – Peregrine 1991.

48 Hodson 1977, 406–410; Jørgensen 1988, 21–22.

49 Hedeager 1992, 103.

50 Hodson 1977, 406–410; Jørgensen 1988, 21–22.

Sex-biased asymmetry of wealth distribution(WDA)

Preliminary investigations of differences in wealth of

grave goods showed that in spite of the very simple

method used to evaluate grave wealth, the result was

close to expectations: the number of graves in successive,

arbitrarily established wealth classes decreased, resulting

in a kind of socio-economic “pyramid” (Fig. 4). The only

exception was the cemetery at Singen, where the majority

of graves belonged to the richest categories. At this stage

of the investigation, ceramic and non-ceramic equipment

was treated separately. However, in further studies these

two categories were analysed together, since in some of

the cemeteries vessels were not deposited in the graves at

all, and in the others their number was distinctly corre-

lated with the number of other elements of equipment.

The initial stage of research brought one more obser-

vation. Although the percentage of male and female

burials in particular wealth categories was similar in the

majority of cemeteries, some sites showed an interesting

asymmetry. There, a higher share of female graves at-

tributed to the highest categories was accompanied by a

Fig. 3: Evaluation of graves wealth obtained by using two different methods:older and younger phase of the Early Bronze Age cemetery in Iwanowice (Małopolska)



Fig. 4: Percentage of female and male graves within arbitrarily assumed equipment classes: Bachórz-Chodorówka (1), Branb (2), Budakalász(3), Chotín (4), Iwanowice (5), Jelåovce (6), Obereching (7), Przeczyce (8), Pysznica (9), Singen (10), Tápé (11), Tiszapolgár-Basatanya (12)



high frequency of male graves totally devoid of grave

goods. The overrepresentation of high-status female

graves and a high number of very modest male burials

may be regarded as manifesting a higher “social mobility”

of women. In the populations characterised by high social

differentiation, men who gain control over available re-

sources become objects of rivalry among women, includ-

ing women from lower classes. This may result in a ten-

dency for women to seek social advancement through

marriage, and the reproductive success of a female be-

comes dependent on the economic status of her husband,

rather than that of her parents51.

On the one hand, in such a situation the polygyny

threshold may operate, and on the other it may strengthen

patriarchal control over the marital decisions of women,

reducing the competitiveness of monogamy52. Asymmetry

in wealth distribution between male and female burials

may thus be perceived as an archaeological indicator for a

high probability of polygyny. A similar interpretation of

this phenomenon has already been proposed in studies on

selected prehistoric cemeteries53.

In order to perform further analyses, the observed

asymmetry of wealth distribution had to be expressed

quantitatively. This was achieved using the following for-

mula:

WDA =Fw : (Fw + Fp)

Mw : (Mw + Mp)

where: Fw – the number of female graves in which the

number of artefacts is equal to the value in the third quar-

tile of the class of female graves (sumptuous female

graves), Fp – the number of female graves devoid of grave

goods (poor female graves), Mw – the number of male

graves in which the number of artefacts is equal to the

value in the third quartile of the class of male graves

(sumptuous male graves), Mp – the number of male graves

devoid of grave goods (poor male graves).

In the calculations, a separate wealth classification was

assumed for male and female graves in order to make up

for possible differences in the standards of equipment re-

sulting from differences in male and female costumes and

burial rituals. A calculated value equal to 1 indicates a

symmetric distribution of wealthy and poor graves of men

and women. A value higher than 1 means that the share of

the poorest burials is higher for men than for women, or

51 E.g. Boone 1986; Shennan 2002, 181–197.

52 Compare: Low 2005, 68–68.

53 Shennan 1975, 285–286; Ter}an 1992, 81.

that the percentage of the most lavishly equipped graves is

higher for women, or both.

Economic inequality

Economic inequality belongs to the factors which may in-

fluence the selection between the two competing mating

systems. Variability of grave wealth, strictly connected

with economic inequality, was determined using the Gini

coefficient – a measure of the inequality of a distribution,

based on the Lorenz curve. The Gini coefficient, long ap-

plied in econometrics, has for some time also been used in

anthropological cross-cultural studies54 and in archaeol-

ogy55. Its value can range from 0 (equal distribution – tot-

ally egalitarian society) to 1; contemporary societies with a

monetary economy are characterised by values from 0.25

to approximately 0.656. As with the wealth distribution

asymmetry (WDA) coefficient, in analyses using the Gini

coefficient grave wealth was evaluated based on the total

number of artefacts in the assemblage. These analyses

were performed for male burials only – which results from

the assumption that in highly hierarchical societies, the

social status of a man is inherited (contrary to the more

“mobile” status of a woman). Thus, male graves may re-

flect a “rigid” picture of unequal access to resources.

Production system – attribution basedon assignment to cultural units

Another factor which may promote one of the two main

mating systems is the predominant form of subsistence.

In deciding what production system should be assigned to

the analysed sites, one should choose between intensive

farming and various forms of economy relying on animal

herding (stationary herding-farming economy, transhu-

mance, mobile pastoralism). The “farming” or “herding”

attribution may be chosen according to economic strategy

thought to be characteristic of the cultural tradition repre-

sented by a given site. Such an approach takes into ac-

count a broad spectrum of observations, but its disadvan-

tage lies in losing a local perspective.

According to the predominant view among scholars,

a significant role of animal herding – or even a pastoral

lifestyle – should be accepted for the population using the

54 Bowles/Smith/Borgerhoff Mulder 2010, 11.

55 Ames 2008, 499–502.

56 Smith et al. 2010b, 30.



cemetery at Tiszapolgár-Basatanya57. This view has been

confirmed by studies on local environmental changes in

the Tisza basin, which revealed distinct traces of defore-

station and animal grazing dated to the mid-fifth millen-

nium BC58. Herding (with the possible local occurrence of

intensive agriculture) is also taken into consideration for

groups representing the Epi-corded Carpathian Cultural

Circle (cemeteries at Branb, Iwanowice and Jelåovce)59 and

for the Tumulus complex (cemetery at Tápé). With regard

to this latter tradition, the old hypothesis about the parti-

ally mobile lifestyle of its populations remains valid60. Fi-

nally, a herding economy and a semi-nomadic or even no-

madic lifestyle is seen as characteristic of the so-called

Vekerzug culture, represented by the cemetery at Chotín61.

However, recent studies have indicated that in the Early

Iron Age the Great Hungarian Plain was also inhabited by

farming groups62.

The predominant form of the economy, or even the

mobility of the Baden complex populations from north-

western Hungary (cemetery at Budakalász) are still dis-

cussed in the literature, although palaeobotanic studies

allow us to assume an important role of farming in this

case63. Permanent settlement, as well as the cultivation of

cereals and leguminous plants, are well documented for

sites in southern Germany, both dating to the Early (cem-

etery at Singen) and Late (cemetery at Obereching) Bronze

Age64. A mixed farming-herding economy is suggested for

the Lusatian culture in the Oder and Vistula basins, repre-

sented in the present work by the cemeteries at Bachórz-

Chodorówka, Przeczyce and Pysznica. Regional studies

provide strong evidence for intensive farming65, while

studies on herd structure indicate a high percentage of

pig, typical of settled populations66.

Grading scale for non-agricultural resources

An examination of specific environmental factors and cer-

tain elements of the archaeological record for each site indi-

vidually may provide us with a more objective method of

57 E.g. Sherratt 1981.

58 E.g. Sümegi 2005, 127; 136–137.

59 Kadrow 1996, 68–76.

60 E.g. Kristiansen 1998, 414.

61 Chochorowski 1985, 133–134.

62 Chapman/Magyari/Gaydarska 2009.

63 Patay/Herbich/Sümegi 2008, 91–94; Gyulai 2010, 89–92; compare

e.g. Whittle 1996, 123; Bondár/Raczky 2009, 480.

64 E.g. Primas 2008, 20–21; 88–89.

65 E.g. Urban 2009.

66 Harding 2000, 134; 140.

evaluating how dependent the populations in question

were on farming. The proposed “grading scale for non-agri-

cultural resources” uses the following variables (ranging

from 0 to 2): vegetation zone where a given site is located

(high score for geographical conditions unfavourable for

farming), importance of animals in the burial rite (high

value of this variable indicates a socio-ritual role of animals,

which is typical of herding groups regardless of its symbolic

interpretations67), access to rare resources (actually ex-

ploited during the period in question) and traces of partici-

pation in long-distance exchange (the participation in long-

distance exchange and control over rare resources might

additionally increase social differentiation and provide

heritable resources other than arable land). A total value of

all the variables produces a coefficient, which may be com-

pared with the WDA index for particular sites (Tab. 1).

The attribution to a vegetation zone was based on gen-

eralised isopollen maps68 representing two chronological

horizons: ca 2000 BC (for sites dating to the Eneolithic and

earlier parts of the Bronze Age) and ca 0 BC/AD (for sites

from the later Bronze Age and the Early Iron Age) (Fig. 5).

The highest score was attributed to the steppe zone and a

slightly lower one to the zone of sub-mountainous veg-

etation. As for the variable describing the share of animal

sacrifices in the burial rite, the highest score was attributed

to the occurrence of animal graves or to a high (over 20%)

percentage of graves containing the remains of sacrificed

animal carcasses69. In all other cases where animal remains

were found in graves, this variable had the value of 170. Ac-

cess to rare resources was granted the highest score in the

case of two Alpine sites, located in the area which was the

economic background for “mountainous” populations en-

gaged in the most intensive exploitation of copper deposits

in prehistoric Europe as a whole71. A slightly lower score

was attributed to the cemeteries at Jelåovce and Branb, lo-

cated close to the zone of the very early exploitation of

copper ore in central Slovakia72, and to the cemetery at Tis-

zapolgár-Basatanya, adjacent to the region where native

copper had already been extracted in the Eneolithic73. The

last variable encompassed the cases where objects of defi-

nitely exotic provenience were recorded. This category in-

67 Stadler 2010.

68 Huntley/Birks 1983.

69 Bognár-Kutzián 1963, 377–386; Duåek 1966, 17–24; Vladár 1973,

165; Bátora 2000, 459–460.

70 Kubasiewicz 1972; Trogmayer 1975, 149; Kadrow/Machnik/Mach-

nik 1992; Höglinger 1993, 53–54; Szybowicz 1995, 20–21; Bátora 2000,

459–460; Czopek 2001, 164–166; Blischke 2002, 111–112; Gál 2009.

71 E.g. Krause 1988, 214–245; Shennan 1995, 300–308.

72 E.g. Schreiner et al. 2005.

73 E.g. Whittle 1996:117–120.



Tab. 1: Data for calculating “non-agricultural resources” score

Site Vegetation zone Animals in burial rite Access to rare resources Access to exotic goods

Bachórz-Chodorówka

Mixed-deciduous forest –0 point

Charred bone remains ingraves, two gravescontaining only the animalbones (including pigremains) – 2 pts

None – 0 pts Only local products – 0 pts

Branb Montane mixeddeciduous-conifer forest –1 point

Numerous graves (37 %)with cattle remains – 2 pts

Neighbourhood of apotential zone of copperacquisition in centralSlovakia – 1 pts

Few faience beads and shellsof Mediterranean origin – 1 pts

Budakalász Montane mixeddeciduous-conifer forest –1 point

Scarce (3 %) gravescontaining the remains ofanimals (most often wildanimals) – 1 pts


Chotín Steppe – 2 points Few horse graves, horsesdeposited in human gravesas well – 2 pts

None – 0 pts Graves with amber beads andsingle gold artefacts andmirrors – 1 pts

Iwanowice Mixed-deciduous forest –0 point

Few animal bones in gravepits – 1 pts

None – 0 pts Few faience beads – 1 pts

Jelåovce Montane mixeddeciduous-conifer forest –1 point

Single graves with animalbones (cattle) – 1 pts

Neighbourhood of apotential zone of copperacquisition in centralSlovakia – 1 pts

Few faience beads – 1 pts

Obereching Montane mixeddeciduous-conifer forest –1 point

Several graves (7.6 %) witpig or sheep remains – 1pts

Direct background of themain zone of copperacquisition – 2 pts

Only local products – 0 pts

Przeczyce Mixed-deciduous forest –0 point

20 graves with cattle andsheep remains – 1 pts


Pysznica Mixed-deciduous forest –0 point

Charred bone remains ingraves (small ruminants inparticular) – 1 pts


Singen Montane mixeddeciduous-conifer forest –1 point

No data available – 0 pts Direct background of themain zone of copperacquisition – 2 pts

Daggers from the “Atlanticmetallurgic centre” – 2 pts

Tápé Steppe – 2 points Pits with animal andhuman bones found oncemetery, few graves withanimal bones – 1 pts


Tiszapolgár-Basatany a

Steppe – 2 points Fragments of animalcarcasses in almost half ofgraves (mainly cattle, butalso goat, sheep and pig).Moreover, dog burialsaccompanying humanburials – 2 pts

Potential neighbourhoodof native copper depositsin NE Hungary – 1 pts

Both stone and copperartefacts (few) may be of alocal origin – 0 pts



Fig. 5: Localisation of the investigated sites against the background of main vegetation zonesaround 2000 BC and 0 BC/AD (after Huntley/Birks 1983): Bachórz-Chodorówka (Ba), Branb (Br),Budakalász (Bu), Chotín (Cho), Iwanowice (Iw), Jelåovce (Je), Obereching (Ob), Przeczyce (Pr),Pysznica (Py), Singen (Si), Tápé (Ta), Tiszapolgár-Basatanya (Ti)



cluded faience beads74 and luxury products of the Iron Age

nomadic peoples75. The highest score was attributed to the

collection of “Atlantic” daggers from the Singen cemetery,

whose foreign provenience – determined based on stylistic

assessment – was confirmed by metallographic analyses76.

ResultsNumerical values obtained in the analysis (Tab. 2) were

listed and compared (Fig. 6). The comparison took into

consideration some additional attributes, such as site

chronology and sex ratio in the analysed populations, ex-

pressed as percentage of female graves.

Examination of grave wealth inequality revealed high

differentiation within the analysed sample. The Gini co-

efficient oscillated between a very low value for the cem-

etery at Bachórz-Chodorówka (0.23) and high results (ex-

ceeding 0.70) for Branb, Jelåovce, Iwanowice and Tápé,

while the mean value for the whole sample amounted to

0.58. A slight correlation can be noted between chrono-

logy and the Gini coefficient value (Fig. 6:A). Dispropor-

tion in grave equipment decreases on sites from later seg-

ments of the Bronze Age and from the Early Iron Age.

Another, although not very significant correlation can be

shown between the Gini coefficient value and the “wealth

74 In spite of the fact that their Mediterranean origin remains open to

question – e.g. Harding/Warren 1973.

75 Duåek 1966, 35–36; Vladár 1973, 152–154; Kadrow/Machnik/Mach-

nik 1992, 81; Bátora 2000, 340–342.

76 Krause 1988, 56–63.

distribution asymmetry” index (Fig. 6:B). The majority of

cemeteries with a WDA value higher than 1 (i.e. cemeteries

used by communities where polygyny could potentially

have occurred) also has a high Gini coefficient value (over

0.65). It is worth noting that this group comprises sites at-

tributed to herding or even pastoral cultural traditions

(black signatures on the diagram). It should also be men-

tioned that the two outliers – the cemeteries at Obereching

and Singen – are distinguished by a low number of graves,

a particularly high standard of grave goods and a low per-

centage of female burials (Tab. 2, Fig. 4).

Another diagram (Fig. 6:C) compares the proportion

of female burials with the “wealth distribution asym-

metry” index. Half of the investigated sites fall into the

range of approximately equal sex distribution (40–50 % of

graves are female), but at the same time show a strong dif-

ferentiation of the WDA index. A slight overrepresentation

of male graves at these sites may result from the applied

methods of sex determination77. However, it is sympto-

matic that three cemeteries with more than 50 % female

graves also have a low WDA index, while three cemeteries

where this index is high (Iwanowice, Obereching and

Singen) show a distinct overrepresentation of male

burials.

The most significant correlation is found when com-

paring the “non-agricultural resources” score with the

WDA index (Fig. 6D). For the five cemeteries with a low

score, which suggests strong dependence on agricultural

resources, the value of the WDA index falls within the

77 Compare: Weiss 1972; Volk/Büchner 1997, 27–29; Chamberlain

2009, 90–91.

Tab. 2: Basic numerical data describing the analysed sites

Site Chronology Number ofana-lysed graves

Share offemales burials (%)

Gini index formales burials

WDA index “non-agriculturalresources” score

Bachórz-ChodorówkaPhase A-AB

14–11 c. BC 51 60 0.23 0.85 2

Branb 21–18 c. BC 137 48 0.70 1.72 5Budakalász 32–25 c. BC 113 62 0.64 0.90 2Chotín 6–5 c. BC 116 69 0.50 1.00 5Iwanowice 21–17 c. BC 90 31 0.80 1.27 2Jelåovce (Nitra Group) 21–18 c. BC 122 40 0.72 1.32 4Obereching 11–10 c. BC 49 30 0.42 1.22 4Przeczyce 10–8 c. BC 96 46 0.44 0.76 1Pysznica 8–4 c. BC 166 40 0.64 0.69 1Singen 22–20 c. BC 33 30 0.46 1.66 5Tápé 17–15 c. BC 335 46 0.75 1.16 3

Tiszapolgár-Basatanya 45–39 c. BC 99 47 0.67 1.19 5



range from 0.69 to 1.27, with a mean of 0.89. For the re-

mainder of the sites, where “non-agricultural resources”

scored at least 3, the mean WDA index was as high as 1.32.

DiscussionIn the present study, overrepresentation of female burials

in the richest equipment classes, accompanied by over-

representation of men in poor burials, is regarded as an in-

dicator of polygyny. However, an alternative explanation

of the high WDA index may be serial monogamy, that is a

situation in which a man has several wives over his whole

life, but only one in a given time span. The most probable

reason for serial monogamy is a higher mortality rate

among women (particularly young women) than men. In

this case we should expect that an overrepresentation of

female graves among richer classes of burials will corre-

late with a significantly lower mean age of the deceased

women compared to the men within the whole popu-

lation, and within the group of wealthier burials in par-

Fig. 6: Comparison of results. In diagram B light signatures stand for sites with farming attribution, black signatures stand forherding attribution. Abbreviations of site names: Bachórz-Chodorówka (Ba), Branb (Br), Budakalász (Bu), Chotín (Cho),Iwanowice (Iw), Jelåovce (Je), Obereching (Ob), Przeczyce (Pr), Pysznica (Py), Singen (Si), Tápé (Ta), Tiszapolgár-Basatanya (Ti)



ticular. In contrast, the difference between the mean age

of women and men is expected to be less among the popu-

lations with a lower WDA index. However, observations

made for all cemeteries do not match these predictions

(e.g. Fig. 7). The mean age of buried women is usually (but

not always) slightly lower than that of men, but variation

of this factor does not correlate completely with the WDA

index. In consequence, polygyny seems the more prob-

able explanation for the observed pattern.

One of the sites where the asymmetry in male and fe-

male grave assemblages is clearest (WDA index = 1.72) is

the cemetery at Branb. This site was previously thoroughly

analysed by Susan Shennan78. Although Shennan applied

different methods for determining the wealth of the

burials and took into account the precise chronology of

grave assemblages, her conclusions are similar to those

obtained in the present study. Shennan regards the pre-

dominance of female burials among sumptuous graves as

a manifestation of polygyny. Sex determination for

children’s graves (based on archaeological criteria) en-

abled her to notice a distinct rise in the number of lavishly

equipped women’s burials compared to few wealthy girls’

burials, which may be interpreted as a result of women’s

social advancement through marriage79.

In this case, the “social mobility” of women may re-

sult from a large inequality among men with regard to

78 Shennan 1975.

79 Shennan 1975, 285–286.

control of resources. The Gini coefficient for male inven-

tories from the Branb cemetery amounts to no less than

0.70. If the differentiation in grave wealth really reflects

economic differentiation, we would here be dealing with a

very high degree of economic inequality80. A similarly

high Gini coefficient value (at least 0.65) was also recorded

for the cemeteries at Iwanowice, Jelåovce, Tiszapolgár-

Basatanya and Tápé. At each of these sites one can notice

a high share of wealthy female graves or an overrepresen-

tation of men among burials devoid of grave goods.

The cemetery at Tápé has attracted particular atten-

tion due to a complex of female graves equipped with

pairs of pins and composite neck ornaments. According to

Jobst Blischke81, these burials represent a group of mature

women of outstanding status, whose special position

would also be also manifested by the location of their

graves in two isolated zones of the cemetery. It is worth

noting that Blischke’s social interpretation of the Tápé

cemetery differs completely from the interpretation pro-

posed in this paper. In Blischke’s opinion, the remarkable

equipment might reflect the women’s high, cult-related,

social position and the weakening of the “men’s world”,

which suffered a global crisis82. In contrast, the evolution-

istic perspective adopted in this paper suggests a general

correlation between the manifestation of wealth in female

80 Compare: Bowles/Smith/Borgerhoff Mulder 2010, 11.

81 Blischke 2002, 59–75; 153.

82 Blischke 2002, 272.

Fig. 7: Age of women and men buried on two cemeteries with the lowest WDA index, and two with the higher one (the cemeteries at Branband Singen having the highest WDA index have been not taken into account since they did not provide longer series of burials with preciseage determination). As “richer” graves are defined those with the number of artefacts larger then the mean for the whole cemetery



costume and the domination of men in real social re-

lations83.

In communities characterised by a productive econ-

omy and inheritance through the male line, increased

economic inequality among men should intensify the

competition among women for the most affluent partners.

This stems from the rule quoted above, which posits that

in such populations a woman’s reproductive success is

more strongly influenced by the social status of her hus-

band than that of her parents. From such a perspective,

lavishness of female dress (reflected in burial) might be

seen as a sign of parental investment in the form of dowry

that increased their daughter’s chances to find a proper

partner or even to marry up the social ladder. The institu-

tion of dowry exists mainly in monogamous populations,

where the competition for the most affluent men is par-

ticularly intensive84. However, one should remember that

in communities where the status of a woman depends on

the status of her husband, it is much more likely that fe-

male costume is used to manifest the value of male-con-

trolled resources. With prestige rivalry, this may lead to a

higher degree of refinement of the shapes, sizes and dec-

oration of female ornaments. A good example seems to be

represented by the Tumulus Circle cemeteries (17th–14th

century BC), such as the above-mentioned site at Tápé

(Gini coefficient = 0.75, WDA index = 1.16). In this cultural

tradition, a remarkable lavishness of female graves is

commonly recorded. There is also a tendency to crowd to-

gether the motifs on bronze ornaments and to enlarge

some of them – bronze pins in particular – to the limits of

their functionality85. Thus, although the form and diver-

sity of female dress in this phase of the Bronze Age might

have served behaviours related to social communi-

cation86, one cannot exclude that the tendency towards

the refinement of material culture itself was a process

initiated by sexual selection.

In populations with little economic inequality among

men, a permanent competition for mating partners is

more likely to take place within the male part of a popu-

lation87. This can be illustrated by the cemetery at

Przeczyce, characterised by a relatively low value of the

Gini coefficient (0.44) and a very low WDA index (0.76).

The distribution of wealth at the site revealed a distinct

bias towards male graves. However, this need not neces-

sarily reflect patriarchal dominance alone – as suggested

83 See Shennan 2002, 205.

84 Compare: Gaulin/Boster 1991; Roth 2004, 74–78.

85 E.g. Wiegel 1994; Innerhofer 2000.

86 E.g. Sørensen 1997.

87 Shennan 2002, 196–197.

by the investigator of the site88. Instead, this may reflect

the tendency towards a higher degree of refinement in

manifesting wealth by men, i.e. the development (under

conditions of competition for resources) of material mani-

festations of prestige, or even of some “epigamous traits”

connected with male rivalry for access to female partners89.

In this case, too, the distinctly higher wealth of the de-

ceased of one of the sexes does not translate into their

higher rank in a society.

Substantial economic inequality among men and the

resulting higher “social mobility” of women do not auto-

matically mean that polygyny will be selected. The com-

petitiveness of polygamy will be reduced by the fact that

the offspring of successive wives are likely to receive less

and less resources from men and by the impossibility to

share durable resources among offspring. Additional,

non-agricultural resources may diminish the importance

of the first factor. Such a situation is recorded for the cem-

eteries at Obereching and Singen (WDA index: 1.22 and

1.66, respectively). In both cases we should take into ac-

count that local populations participated both in supply-

ing provisions to the centres of copper ore mining and in

redistributing their products. The low differentiation of

grave assemblages on both sites (Gini coefficient below

0.50) may be explained by their generally high wealth.

However, it cannot be excluded that this result was af-

fected by the low number of female graves at the two sites.

The constraint on the spread of polygyny related to

the depreciation of durable resources after dividing them

among offspring may be less important for populations

which rely primarily on animal herding. Among the ana-

lysed sites, a “culturally” ascribed herding attribution ac-

companied by a high “non-agricultural resources” score is

recorded for the Eneolithic cemetery at Tiszapolgár-Basat-

anya, the sites at Branb and Jelåovce connected with the

Epi-corded complex, the Tumulus culture cemetery at

Tápé and the Iron Age Vekerzug culture cemetery at Cho-

tín. All these sites had a WDA index equal to at least 1. Per-

haps it is no coincidence that the WDA value was the lo-

west in the case of the cemetery at Chotin, which – as the

only one in the group – also has a rather low coefficient of

grave good inequality among males (0.50). We may make

a cautious suggestion that polygamous marriages were

admissible in the populations using these cemeteries. Per-

haps the site at Iwanowice should also be added to this

group. Undoubtedly, it represents a cultural tradition

characterised by a production system which relied – at

88 Szydłowska 1972, 201.

89 Compare e.g. Boone 1998; Bliege Bird/Smith 2005.



least at the beginning of its development – on mobile

herding90. On the other hand, the low “non-agricultural

resources” value (2 pts) for this cemetery corresponds for

this cemetery with the discovery of a neighbouring, large,

long-lasting settlement with numerous pits used to store

farm produce91. Regardless of the conclusions about the

economy of the Iwanowice population, it is worthwhile

noting that the high WDA index (1.27) correlates with

the highest recorded coefficient of grave good inequality

among male graves (0.80).

ConclusionsGeneralising the above observations, one can state that

the results of the present study agree with the previously

formulated expectations. The elements of the archaeologi-

cal record which may indicate the occurrence of polygyny

generally correlate with two factors which favour it: high

economic inequality among males and an economy in

which resources are not depreciated when shared among

numerous offspring (thus not decreasing their fitness). A

second general conclusion is methodological. It seems

that the results presented here allow us to accept that ar-

chaeological sources can be analysed following the pro-

cedures typical of anthropological cross-cultural studies,

that is by comparing selected variables which describe un-

connected populations92. Further development of this re-

search procedure may, on the one hand, enrich studies on

the problem of how the actual functioning of prehistoric

populations is reflected in the archaeological record and

provide information about particular communities, while

on the other hand it may elucidate the development over a

long time period of more universal phenomena studied by

the ecology of human behaviours.

AcknowledgementsA preliminary version of this paper was presented in 2010

at the EAA Annual Meeting in The Hague, as part of the

session dedicated to women’s status in prehistory. I

warmly thank the organisers – Bettina Arnold and Hrvoje

Potrebica – for enabling me to present the results of my

studies. The paper in its present form owes much to the

90 Kadrow 1996:68–76.

91 Kadrow 1991.

92 As it has already been postulated before – eg. Peregrine 2001.

critical remarks and bibliographic suggestions of Stephen

Shennan, Peter Bogucki and an anonymous reviewer, for

which I am also very grateful. I would like to thank Mag-

dalena Skoneczna for discussions that resulted in the

method used to evaluate the subsistence of the popu-

lations investigated here. The translation into English was

carried out by Piotr Godlewski. The paper took its final

shape – in respect of both its merits and form – thanks

to critical and inspiring comments of Marzena Przybyła,

whom I wish to thank very much for her help and non-

schematic approach to the issues presented here.

ReferencesAdler 1996: M. A. Adler, Land tenure, archaeology, and the ancestral

Pueblo social landscape. Journal Anthr. Arch. 15, 1996, 337–371.Alexander 2009: R. D. Alexander, The Biology of Moral Systems (New

Brunswick 2009).Ames 2008: K. M. Ames, The archaeology of rank. In: R. A. Bentley/

H. D. G. Maschner/Ch. Chippendale (eds), Handbook ofArchaeological Theories (Lanham 2008), 487–513.

Bartel 1982: B. Bartel, A historic review of ethnological andarchaeological analyses of mortuary practice. Journal Anthr.Arch. 1, 1982, 32–58.

Bátora 2000: J. Bátora, Das Gräberfeld von Jelåovce/Slowakei. EinBeitrag zur Frühbronzezeit im nordwestlichen Karpatenbecken.Prähist. Arch. Südosteuropa 16 (Kiel 2000).

Beise/Voland 2002: J. Beise/E. Voland, Differential infant mortalityviewed from an evolutionary biological perspective. Hist.Family 7, 2002, 515–526.

Bernbeck 1997: R. Bernbeck, Theorien in der Archäologie. Uni-Ta-schenbücher 1964 (Tübingen-Basel 1997).

Bliege Bird/Smith 2005: R. Bliege Bird/E. A. Smith, Signaling theory,strategic interaction, and symbolic capital. Current Anthr. 46(2), 2005, 221–248.

Blischke 2002: J. Blischke, Gräberfelder als Spiegel der historischenEntwicklung während der mittleren Bronzezeit im mittlerenDonaugebiet. Univforsch. prähist. Arch. 80 (Bonn 2002).

Bognár-Kutzián 1963: I. Bognár-Kutzián, The Copper Age Cemeteryof Tiszapolgár-Basatanya. Arch. Hungarica 42 (Budapest1963).

Bondár/Raczky 2009: M. Bondár/P. Raczky (eds), The Copper AgeCemetery of Budakalász (Budapest 2009).

Boone 1986: J. L. Boone, Parental investment and elite family struc-ture in preindustrial states: A case study of Late Medieval-EarlyModern Portuguese genealogies. American Anthr. 88 (4), 1986,859–878.

– 1998: –, The evolution of magnanimity. When is it better to givethan to receive? Human Nat. 9 (1), 1998, 1–21.

Borgerhoff Mulder 1990: M. Borgerhoff Mulder, Kipsigis women’spreferences for wealthy men: evidence for female choicein mammals? Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 27, 1990,255–264.

– et al. 2010: –/I. Fazzio/W. Irons/R. McElreath/A. Bell/S. Bowles/T. Hertz/L. Hazzah, Pastoralism and wealth inequality: revisit-ing an old question. Current Anthr. 51, 2010, 35–48.



Bowles/Choi/Hopfensitz 2003: S. Bowles/J.-K. Choi/A. Hopfensitz,The co-evolution of individual behaviors and social institutions.Journal Theoret. Biol. 223, 2003, 135–147.

Bowles/Smith/Borgerhoff Mulder 2010: S. Bowles/E. A. Smith/M. Borgerhoff Mulder, The emergence and presistence ofinequality in premodern societies. Introduction to the specialedition. Current Anthr. 51 (1), 2010, 7–17.

Brown/Laland/Borgerhoff Mulder 2009: G. R. Brown/K. N. Laland/M. Borgerhoff Mulder, Bateman’s principles and human sexroles. Trends Ecol. Evolution 24 (6), 2009, 297–304.

Chamberlain 2009: A. T. Chamberlain, Archaeological demography.Human Biol. 81 (2–3), 2009, 275–286.

Chapman/Magyari/Gaydarska 2009: J. Chapman/E. Magyari/B. Gay-darska, Contrasting subsistence strategies in the Early Iron Age?New results from the Alföld Plain, Hungary, and the ThracianPlain, Bulgaria. Oxford Journal Arch. 28 (2), 2009, 155–187.

Chochorowski 1985: J. Chochorowski, Die Vekerzug-Kultur. Charak-teristik der Funde. Prace Arch. 36 (Kraków 1985).

Chu 1991: C. Y. C. Chu, Primogeniture. Journal Polit. Economy 99,1991, 78–99.

Czopek 2001: S. Czopek, Pysznica, pow. Stalowa Wola, stanowisko1 – cmentarzysko ciałopalne z przełomu epok bräzu i zelaza(Rzeszów 2001).

Duåek 1966: M. Duåek, Thrakisches Gräberfeld der Hallstattzeit inChotín. Arch. Slovaca Fontes 6 (Bratislava 1966).

Ember/Ember/Low 2007: M. Ember/C. R. Ember/B. S. Low, Compar-ing explanations of polygyny. Cross-Cultural Res. 41 (4), 2007,428–440.

Fortunato 2011: L. Fortunato, Reconstructing the History of MarriageStrategies in Indo-European-Speaking Societies: Monogamyand Polygyny. Human Biol. 83 (1), 2011, 87–105.

–/Archetti 2010: –/M. Archetti, Evolution of monogamous marriageby maximalization of inclusive fitness. Journal Evolut. Biol. 23(1), 2010, 149–156.

Gál 2009: E. Gál, Animal bone offerings from cemetery at Budakalász.In: M. Bondár/P. Raczky (eds), The Copper Age Cemetery ofBudakalász (Budapest 2009), 371–378.

Gaulin/Boster 1991: S. J. C. Gaulin/J. S. Boster, Dowry as female com-petition. American Anthr. 92, 1991, 994–1005.

Gedl 1994: M. Gedl, Cmentarzysko z epoki bräzu w Bachórzu-Chodo-rówce (Kraków 1994).

Gurven et al. 2010: M. Gurven/M. Borgerhoff Mulder/S. Bowles/P. L. Hooper/H. Kaplan/R. Quinlan/R. Sear/E. Schniter/C. vonRueden/A. Bell/T. Hertz, Domestication alone does not leadto inequality: intergenerational wealth transmission amonghorticulturalists. Current Anthr. 51, 2010, 49–63.

Gyulai 2010: F. Gyulai, Archaeobotany in Hungary. Seed, Fruit, Foodand Beverage Remains in the Carpathian Basin from theNeolithic to the Late Middle Age. Archeolingua 21 (Budapest2009).

Hedeager 1992: L. Hedeager, Iron-Age Societies. From Tribe to Statein Northern Europe, 500 BC to AD 700 (Oxford 1992).

Harding 2000: A. F. Harding, European Societies in the Bronze Age(Cambridge 2000).

–/Warren 1973: –/S. E. Warren, Early Bronze Age faience beads fromCentral Europe. Antiquity 47, 1973, 64–66.

Hartung 1982: J. Hartung, Polygyny and inheritance of wealth.Current Anthr. 23 (1), 1982, 1–12.

Hodson 1977: F. R. Hodson, Quantifying Hallstatt: some initialresults. American Ant. 42 (3), 1977, 394–412.

Höglinger 1993: P. Höglinger, Das urnenfelderzeitliche Gräberfeldvon Obereching, Land Salzburg. Arch. Salzburg 2 (Salzburg1993).

Huntley/Birks 1983: B. Huntley/H. J. B.Birks, An Atlas of Pastand Present Pollen Maps for Europe: 0–13,000 Years Ago(Cambridge 1983).

Innerhofer 2000: F. Innerhofer, Die mittelbronzezeitliche Nadelnzwischen Vogesen und Karpaten. Studien zur Chronologie,Typologie und regionalen Gliederung der Hügelgräberkultur,part 1–2. Univforsch. Prähist. Arch. 71 (Bonn 2000).

Jørgensen 1988: L. Jørgensen, Family burial practices and inherit-ance systems. The development of an Iron Age Society from 500BC to AD 1000 on Bornholm, Denmark. Acta Arch. 58, 1987,17–53.

Kadrow 1991: S. Kadrow, Iwanowice, stanowisko Babia Góra, cz.I. Rozwój przestrzenny osady z wczesnego okresu epoki bräzu(Kraków 1991).

– 1996: –, Gospodarka i Społeczeñstwo. Wczesny okres epokibräzu w Małopolsce (Kraków 1996).

Kadrow/Machnik/Machnik 1992: S. Kadrow/A. Machnik/J. Machnik,Iwanowice, stanowisko Babia Góra. Cmentarzysko z wczesnegookresu epoki bräzu (Kraków 1992).

Krause 1988: R. Krause, Die endneolithischen und frühbronzezeit-lichen Grabfunde auf der Nordstadtterrasse von Singen amHohentwiel. Forsch. u. Ber. z. Vor- u. Frühgesch. Baden-Würt-temberg 32 (Stuttgart 1988).

Kristiansen 1998: K. Kristiansen, Europe before History (Cambridge1998).

Kubasiewicz 1972: M. Kubasiewicz, Szczätki zwierzèce z cmentarzy-ska kultury łuzyckiej w Przeczycach pow. Zawiercie. In: E.Szydłowska, Cmentarzysko kultury łuzyckiej w Przeczycach,powiat Zawiercie. Materiały. Rocznik Muz. Górnoîläskiego wBytomiu, Arch. 5 (Bytom 1968), 259–274.

Kunter 1993: M. Kunter, Ergebnisse der anthropologischen Untersuc-hung von urnrnfelderzeitlichen Leichenbränden aus dem Grä-berfeld von Obereching. In: P. Höglinger, Das urnenfelderzeit-liche Gräberfeld von Obereching, Land Salzburg. Arch.Salzburg 2 (Salzburg 1993), 208–216.

Low 1988: B. S. Low, Measures of polygyny in humans. Current Anthr.29 (1), 1988, 189–194.

– 2005: –, Women’s live there, here, then, now: a review ofwomen’s ecological and demographic constraints cross-cul-turally. Evolution and Human Behavior 26, 2005, 64–87.

Mace/Holden 2005: R. Mace/C. J. Holden, A phylogenetic approachto cultural evolution. Trends Ecol. Evolution 20 (3), 2005,116–121.

Marlowe 2003: F. W. Marlowe, The mating system of foragers in theStandard Cross-Cultural Sample. Cross-Cultural Res. 37 (3),2003, 282–306.

– 2005: –, Hunter-gatherers and human evolution. Evolut. Anthr.14, 2005, 54–67.

Müller/Bernbeck 1996: J. Müller/R. Bernbeck, Prestige und Prestige-güter aus kulturanthropologischer und archäologischer Sicht.In: J. Müller/R. Bernbeck (eds), Prestige – Prestigegüter –Sozialstrukturen. Beispiele aus dem europäischen und vorder-asiatischen Neolithikum. Arch. Ber. 6 (Bonn 1996), 1–27.

Murdock/White 2006: G. P. Murdock/D. R. White, Standard Cross-Cultural Sample: on-line edition, UC Irvine: Social Dynamics andComplexity. http://escholarship.org/uc/item/62c5c02n,04. 03. 2011.



Orians 1969: G. H. Orians, On the evolution of mating systemsin birds and mammals. American Naturalist 103 (934), 1969,589–603.

Patay/Herbich/Sümegi 2008: R. Patay/K. Herbich/P. Sümegi,Late Copper Age settlement of Ecser (County Pest, Hungary):archaeological and environmental archeological investigations.In: M. Furholt/M. Szmyt/A. Zastawny (eds), The Baden Com-plex and the Outside World. Studia nad Pradziejami EuropyÎrodkowej. Stud. z. Arch. Ostmitteleuropa 4 (Bonn 2008),89–94.

Peregrine 1991: P. Peregrine, Some political aspects of craft special-ization. World Arch. 23 (1), 1991, 1–11.

– 2001: –, Cross-cultural comparative approaches in archaeology.Ann. Rev. Anthr. 30, 1–18.

Primas 2008: M. Primas, Bronzezeit zwischen Elbe und Po. Struktur-wandel in Zentraleuropa 2200–800 v. Chr. Univforsch. z. prä-hist. Arch. 150 (Bonn 2008).

Roth 2004: E. A. Roth, Culture, Biology, and AnthropologicalDemography. New Perspectives on Anthropological and SocialDemography (Cambridge 2004).

Scheidel 2009: W. Scheidel, Monogamy and polygyny. Princeton/Stanford Working Papers in Classics. www.princeton.edu/rpswpc/pdfs/scheidel/010903.pdf, 06. 02. 2010.

Schreiner et al. 2005: M. Schreiner/A. W. G. Pike/G. L. Foster/E. Pernicka, Provenance of metal artefacts in archaeology.In: J. Labuda (ed.), Montanna archeologia na Slovensku (BanskaStiavnica 2005), 33–40.

Sellen/Borgerhoff Mulder/Sieff 2000: D. W. Sellen/M. BorgerhoffMulder/D. F. Sieff, Fertility, offspring quality, and wealth inDatoga pastoralist: testing evolutionary models of intersexualselection. In: L. Cronk/N. Chagnon/W. Irons (eds), Adaptationand Human Behavior (New York 2000), 49–68.

Shenk et al. 2010: M. K. Shenk/M. Borgerhoff Mulder/S. Bowles/J. Beise/G. Clark/W. Irons/D. Leonetti/B. S. Low/T. Hertz/A. Bell/P. Piraino, Intergenerational wealth transmissionamong agriculturalists: foundations of agrarian inequality.Current Anthr. 51, 2010, 65–83.

Shennan 1975: S. Shennan, The social organisation at Branb.Antiquity 49, 1975, 279–288.

Shennan 1995: S. J. Shennan, Bronze Age Copper Producers of theEastern Alps. Excavations at St. Veit-Klinglberg. Univforsch. z.prähist. Arch. 27 (Bonn 1995).

– 2002: –, Genes, memes and human history. Darwinian archae-ology and cultural evolution (London 2002).

– 2011: –, Property and wealth inequality as cultural nicheconstruction, Phil. Transactions Royal Soc. B 366, 2011,918–926.

Sherratt 1972: A. Sherratt, Socio-economic and demographic modelsfor the Neolithic and Bronze Age of Europe. In: D. Clarke (ed.),Models in Archaeology (London 1972), 477–542.

– 1981: –, Plough and pastoralism: aspect of the secondary prod-uct revolution. In: I. Hodder/G. Isaac/N. Hammond (eds), Pat-tern of the Past: Studies in Honour of David Clarke (Cambridge1981), 261–305.

Smith et al. 2010a: E. A. Smith/M. Borgerhoff Mulder/S. Bowles/M. Gurven/T. Hertz/M. K. Shenk, Production systems,inheritance, and inequality in premodern societies: conclusions.Current Anthr. 51 (1), 2010, 85–94.

Smith et al. 2010b: E. A. Smith/K. Hill/F. W. Marlowe/D.Nolin/P. Wiessner/M. Gurven/S. Bowles/M. BorgerhoffMulder/T. Hertz/A. Bell, Wealth transmission and inequalityamong hunter-gatherers. Current Anthr. 51 (1), 2010, 19–34.

Sørensen 1997: M. L. S. Sørensen, Reading dress: the construction ofsocial categories and identities in Bronze Age Europe. EuropeanJournal Arch. 5 (1), 1997, 93–114.

Stadler 2010: J. Stadler, Nahrung für die Toten? Speisebeigaben inhallstattzeitlichen Gräbern und ihre kulturhistorische Deutung.Univforsch z. prähist. Arch. 186 (Bonn 2010).

Strassmann 2000: B. I. Strassmann, Polygyny, family structure andchild mortality: a prospective study among the Dogon of Mali.In: L. Cronk/N. Chagnon/W. Irons (eds), Adaptation and HumanBehavior (New York 2000), 49–68.

Sümegi 2005: P. Sümegi, Paleoenvironmental studies of the PocsajMarsh. In: E. Gál/I. Juhász/P. Sümegi (eds), EnvironmentalArchaeology in North-Eastern Hungary. Varia Arch. Hungarica 19(Budapest 2005), 127–137.

Szybowicz 1995: B. Szybowicz, Cmentarzysko z epoki bräzu wBachórzu-Chodorówce. Analiza antr. (Kraków 1995).

Szydłowska 1968: E. Szydłowska, Cmentarzysko kultury łuzyckiejw Przeczycach, powiat Zawiercie. Materiały. Rocznik Muz.Górnoîläskiego w Bytomiu, Arch. 5 (Bytom 1968).

– 1972: –, Cmentarzysko kultury łuzyckiej w Przeczycach,powiat Zawiercie. Omówienie materiałów. Rocznik Muz.Górnoîläskiego w Bytomiu, Arch. 5 (Bytom 1972).

Ter}an 1992: B. Ter}an, Bemerkungen zu H. Parzingers Chronologieder Späthallstatt- und Frühlatènezeit. Praehist. Zeitschr. 67,1992, 66–89.

Trivers 1972: R. L. Trivers, Parental investment and sexual selection.In: B. Campbell (ed.), Sexual Selection and the Descent of Man1871–1971 (London 1972), 136–179.

Trogmayer 1975: O. Trogmayer, Das bronzezeitliche Gräberfeld beiTápé. Fontes Arch. Hungariae (Budapest 1975).

Urban 2009: J. Urban, Uwagi na temat uprawy roli w tarnobrzeskiejkulturze łuzyckiej na podstawie materiałów z Polski południowo-wschodniej. In: S. Czopek/K. Trybała-Zawiîlak (eds), Tar-nobrzeska kultura łuzycka – ïródła i interpretacje. CollectioArch. Ressoviensis 11 (Rzeszów 2009), 289–301.

Vladár 1973: J. Vladár, Pohrebiská zo staråej doby bronzovej v Branbi.Arch. Slovaca – Fontes 12 (Bratislava 1973).

Volk/Büchner 1997: P. Volk/S. Büchner, Das „Frauendefizit” vor-geschichtlicher und antiker Populationen als methodischeProblem der Anthropologie. In: K.-F. Rittershofer (ed.),Demographie der Bronzezeit. Paläodemographie – Möglich-keiten und Grenzen. Internat. Arch. 36 (Espelkamp 1997),25–29.

Weiss 1972: K. Weiss, On the systematic bias in skeletal sexing.American Journal Physical Anthr. 37, 1972, 239–250.

White 1988: D. R. White, Rethinking polygyny: co-wives, codes andcultural systems. Current Anthr. 29 (4), 1988, 529–572.

–/Burton 1988: –/M. L. Burton, Causes of Polygyny: Ecology, Econ-omy, Kinship, and Warfare. American Anthr. 90, 1988, 871–887.

Whittle 1996: A. Whittle, Europe in the Neolithic. The Creation of NewWorlds (Cambridge 1996).

Wiegel 1994: B. Wiegel, Trachtkreise im südlichen Hügelgräber-kulturbereich. 1 – Auswertung. Internat. Arch. 5 (Espelkamp1994).


Mating systems in prehistoric populations. An evolutionary approach and archaeological evidence, PZ...

Documents

Transcript of Mating systems in prehistoric populations. An evolutionary approach and archaeological evidence, PZ...